45 research outputs found
Ludovic Halbert, Lâavantage mĂ©tropolitain, Paris, Presses Universitaires de France, Collection « La ville en dĂ©bat, », 2010, 143 pages.
Comment pourrait-on dĂ©finir une mĂ©tropole ? Et si cette catĂ©gorie se rĂ©vĂšle pertinente, quels sont les facteurs de sa prospĂ©ritĂ©Â ? Lâauteur de lâavantage mĂ©tropolitain sâappuie sur lâĂ©conomie territoriale pour dĂ©crire et analyser ce qui fait lâavantage Ă©conomique des rĂ©gions mĂ©tropolitaines dans la mondialisation. A la fois essai sur les politiques dâamĂ©nagement et synthĂšse des travaux portant sur ces questions, cet ouvrage propose une vision territorialisĂ©e et systĂ©mique du phĂ©nomĂšne de mĂ©tr..
Participation and Co-creation in Citizen Science
Podeu consultar el llibre complet a: http://hdl.handle.net/2445/173349Citizen science practices have different frames to general scientific
research â the adoption of participatory methods in research design has long been
pursued in citizen science projects. The citizen science research design process
should be inclusive, flexible, and adaptive in all its stages, from research question
formulation to evidence-based collective results. Some citizen science initiatives
adopt strategies that include co-creation techniques and methodologies from a wide
variety of disciplines and practices. In this sense, the will to collaborate between
researchers and other stakeholders is not new. It is traditionally found in public
participation in science, including participatory action research (PAR) and the
involvement of civil society organisations (CSOs) in research, as well as in mediatory
structures, such as science shops. This chapter critically reviews methodologies,
techniques, skills, and participation based on experiences of civic involvement and co-creation in research and discusses their limitations and potential improvements.
Our focus is on the reflexivity approach and infrastructure needed to design citizen
science projects, as well as associated key roles. Existing tools that can be used to
enhance and improve citizen participation at each stage of the research process will
also be explored. We conclude with a series of reflections on participatory practices
Broad and narrow personality traits as markers of one-time and repeated suicide attempts: A population-based study
<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Studying personality traits with the potential to differentiate between individuals engaging in suicide attempts of different degrees of severity could help us to understand the processes underlying the link of personality and nonfatal suicidal behaviours and to identify at-risk groups. One approach may be to examine whether narrow, i.e., lower-order personality traits may be more useful than their underlying, broad personality trait dimensions.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We investigated qualitative and quantitative differences in broad and narrow personality traits between one-time and repeated suicide attempters in a longitudinal, population-based sample of young French Canadian adults using two multivariate regression models.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>One broad (Compulsivity: OR = 2.0; 95% CI 1.2â3.5) and one narrow personality trait (anxiousness: OR = 1.1; 95% CI 1.01â1.1) differentiated between individuals with histories of repeated and one-time suicide attempts. Affective instability [(OR = 1.1; 95% CI 1.04â1.1)] and anxiousness [(OR = .92; 95% CI .88â.95)], on the other hand, differentiated between nonattempters and one-time suicide attempters.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Emotional and cognitive dysregulation and associated behavioural manifestations may be associated with suicide attempts of different severity. While findings associated with narrow traits may be easier to interpret and link to existing sociobiological theories, larger effect sizes associated with broad traits such as Compulsivity may be better suited to objectives with a more clinical focus.</p
Bred or wild participation
International audienc
Le dialogue et lâenquĂȘte du public
Le contexte politique contemporain est marquĂ© par lâessor dâune participation dĂ©mocratique des citoyens Ă des processus de discussion et de dĂ©cision identifiĂ©s Ă un « nouvel esprit de la dĂ©mocratie » (Blondiaux, 2008). Cette demande de participation parfois diffuse est reconnue dans le droit europĂ©en et national et sâest concrĂ©tisĂ©e notamment dans des dispositifs institutionnels (dĂ©bat public, confĂ©rence de citoyens, etc.). Elle Ă©merge dĂ©sormais dans le champ de la gouvernance publique (Ătat,..
Bred or wild participation
International audienc
Spontaniczna czy konstruowana partycypacja?
The development of the participation proposal for French citizens leads us to examine whether state organized participatory democracy hinders socialchange. The taking over of deliberation and participation functions by state
and corporate bodies through regulations and initiatives such as participatory devices seems to both stimulate and channel citizen participation in decision making processes. More and more scholars study these institutional devices,
criticizing the âprocedural tropismâ [Mazeaud, 2011] observed in the literature. Indeed, the proceduralization of citizen participation over the last years, embodied in established and standardized devices which are controlled
by a public or administrative institution, is of great social significance. Those standardized forms of debate, conceived in a top down approach by state and public bodies are also becoming compulsory in different fields of
public action. Environmental law recent developments in France for instance are increasingly calling for citizensâ inclusion, as well as urban planning. This institutionalization process produces at least two main types of
consequences. According to Fourniau and Blondiaux [2011] it âcoincides first of all with a renunciation of a large-scale social changeâ. These participative settings multiply and are often localized and time limited. They are aimed at
what Fung [2003] calls the âmini publicâ. They do not allow sufficiently broad and concrete deliberative structures which enable real citizen expression. At the same time proceduralization usually gives control over participation
to the authorities who organize it. The way in which they frame power, stage public meetings and animation choices reduces the margin of uncertainty which maintains openness and freedom of speech at debates. We have already highlighted this institutional issue and its political consequences for public debate [Revel, 2007]. Can we suggest that the shape of the participatory devices contributes to defining the form of justifiable public participation?
The opposing argument about public debate proposed by Mermet [2007] lies in between âwild democracyâ and âbred democracyâ.RozwĂłj projektu obywatelskiej partycypacji we Francji prowadzi do zbadania znanego z literatury âtropizmu proceduralnegoâ [Mazaud, 2011]. Proceduralizacja obywatelskiego uczestnictwa urzeczywist niana za poĆrednictwem ustalonych i st andardowych pomysĆĂłw, kontro lowana pr zez publiczne lub administr acyjne instytucje, jest w ost atnich latach najwaĆŒniejszym faktem spoĆecznym. Celem tego artykuĆu jest ocena widocznych efektĂłw instytucjonalizacji i proceduralizacji partycypacji obywatelskiej w publicznej akcji we Francji. Proces instytucjonalizacji
powoduje co najmniej dwa rodzaje skutkĂłw. Wg Fourniau i Blondiaux [2011] przede wszystkim ona âwspĂłĆgra z pojawieniem siÄ zmiany spoĆecznej o szerokiej skaliâ. Przejawy partycypacji sÄ
czÄsto lokalizowane w ograniczonym czasie. Fung [2003] nazywa je âmini publicâ. Nie prowadzÄ
do szerokiej deliberacji i do konkretnej formy, pozwalajÄ
cej na rzetelnÄ
ekspresjÄ obywateli. Do innych skutkĂłw naleĆŒy to, ĆŒe proceduralizacja zazwyczaj umoĆŒliwia kontrolowanie partycypacji przez wĆadze. Ich siĆa, spotkania publiczne i sposoby dziaĆania redukujÄ
marg ines niepewnoĆci,
co prowadzi do utrzymania otwartej debaty i wolnoĆci sĆowa. W ten sposĂłb podkreĆlono wagÄ instytucjonalizacji i jej polityczne skutki dla debaty publicznej [Revel, 2007]. Czy moĆŒemy sÄ
dziÄ, ĆŒe ksztaĆt projektu partycypacji przyczynia siÄ do zdefiniowania publicznoĆci i form partycypacji? Mermet [2007] zaproponowaĆ okreĆlenie debaty publicznej jako opozycji miÄdzy âdzikÄ
â (spontanicznÄ
) demokracjÄ
i âbredâ (konstruowanÄ
) demokracjÄ
Joëlle Zask, Participer. Essai sur les formes démocratiques de la participation
« Il incombe aux sociĂ©tĂ©s dâassurer la participation de leurs membres en mettant Ă leur disposition les mĂ©thodes, outils, ressources, qui leur permettent de sâintĂ©grer, non seulement sans quâils aient Ă sacrifier leur individualitĂ©, mais en outre, en jouissant dâopportunitĂ©s de dĂ©veloppement personnel » (p 278). JoĂ«lle Zask, connue pour ses travaux sur le pragmatisme, et la thĂ©orie de la justice de Dewey, nous invite cette fois Ă un voyage dans lâunivers de la participation, quâelle dĂ©coupe e..
Prologue. Quelles critiques du dialogue ?
Il faut « entamer, poursuivre, entretenir, approfondir, renforcer le dialogue », mĂȘme sâil est possible de le « rompre » et de le « reprendre », de « renouer ses fils » afin de ne pas en rester Ă un « dialogue avorté », ou pire, un « dialogue de sourds » oĂč il se trouverait alors « dans lâimpasse » ; il faut aussi « instituer » ou « institutionnaliser le dialogue social », instaurer un « dialogue des cultures » face aux pĂ©rils du « choc des civilisations », ferment de la guerre ouverte qui si..